I told myself I wasn't going to go on a long winded rant about this; but **** it you've made me do it. Here it goes...

For months leading up the draft it was obivious that the Texans should pick either Reggie Bush or Vince Young. Young is basically seen as the second coming of Jesus in the city of Houston which would have boosted ticket sales and judging by the way he played for the Titans a few more wins. They could have easily traded Carr to a team that needed a QB. Reggie would have been the spark to the offense that the team needed. They could have ran a duel back system with him and Davis similar to Deuce and Reggie. Carr finally would have had another target besides Andre Johnson.

Yet, they decide to draft neither of these guys and their is excuse is that Carr and Davis are their franchise offensive players. Apparently in Houston franchise means one season as they were both cut on Friday. You explain to me, logically, how in one year a quarterback goes from "the franchise" to being cut. They went back on everything they said last April with their trade for Schaub and their cuts of Davis and Carr.

The other excuse they used was that they wouldn't be able to stop anybody with Reggie and Vince. Fair arguement but guess what. They still can't stop anybody. Mario Williams may have great potential but he didn't do squat his rookie year while Vince Young won Rookie Of The Year and damn near lead his team to playoffs while the Texans finished with the eighth overall selection and Bush was a key part to the Saints rise to the elite in the NFC.

Explain to me how you had a succesful draft when everybody in the stadium is cheering the rival's quarterback as he scores the game winning TD.

Since you are unaware of this, I will inform you of why Reggie would not be a good pick for us. At the time we had no reason to believe that Domanick Davis would not be ready to start the season. We had our starting RB, and he was quite good here. Reggie Bush is not a good fit for a ZBS offense, which is what we run. He dances too much. We already had a "dancer" in Vernand Morency, and he wasn't that good in our scheme so we got rid of him.

We didn't want to give up on Carr after just four seasons, so we decided to allow him one more. No matter who we took on offense, we wouldn't win that many more games because of how bad our defense was. We were letting in too many points to contend in games, so big surprise we went defense in the draft. We picked one of the most amazing physical freaks in the last 5 years to help jump-start our defense. No he didn't play up to the billing of a first overall pick, but he was a solid starter, and improved over the season despite being hampered by injury.

Yes Vince would be awesome, but we wanted to give Carr a chance.

Ok here is something that is going to change the way that you look at the world. Are you ready, here is this earthshattering statement that you need to hear: There is more than one round in the draft. Lets take a look at the other players the Texans got in the draft.

1st- Mario Williams: Solid player, not great, but has been improving.
2nd- Demeco Ryans: Huge steal in the second round, DPOY, had one of the most dominant seasons for a rookie LB in the history of the NFL.
3rd- Charles Spencer: Started quickly, and became the best offensive lineman on our line. A great pickup in the third round.
3rd- Eric Winston: Started later in the season, was solid
4th- Owen Daniels: The best rookie tight end
6th- Wali Lundy: Effective change of pace back, had some good runs

As for the Saints rising to the top that was much more because of Drew Brees than Reggie Bush.

People in Houston love Vince, many Houstonians went to UT, I was cheering on that run too. Even though he's on the Titans we still root for him to do well.

Since you are unaware of this, I will inform you of why Reggie would not be a good pick for us. At the time we had no reason to believe that Domanick Davis would not be ready to start the season. We had our starting RB, and he was quite good here. Reggie Bush is not a good fit for a ZBS offense, which is what we run. He dances too much. We already had a "dancer" in Vernand Morency, and he wasn't that good in our scheme so we got rid of him.

We didn't want to give up on Carr after just four seasons, so we decided to allow him one more. No matter who we took on offense, we wouldn't win that many more games because of how bad our defense was. We were letting in too many points to contend in games, so big surprise we went defense in the draft. We picked one of the most amazing physical freaks in the last 5 years to help jump-start our defense. No he didn't play up to the billing of a first overall pick, but he was a solid starter, and improved over the season despite being hampered by injury.

Yes Vince would be awesome, but we wanted to give Carr a chance.

Ok here is something that is going to change the way that you look at the world. Are you ready, here is this earthshattering statement that you need to hear: There is more than one round in the draft. Lets take a look at the other players the Texans got in the draft.

1st- Mario Williams: Solid player, not great, but has been improving.
2nd- Demeco Ryans: Huge steal in the second round, DPOY, had one of the most dominant seasons for a rookie LB in the history of the NFL.
3rd- Charles Spencer: Started quickly, and became the best offensive lineman on our line. A great pickup in the third round.
3rd- Eric Winston: Started later in the season, was solid
4th- Owen Daniels: The best rookie tight end
6th- Wali Lundy: Effective change of pace back, had some good runs

As for the Saints rising to the top that was much more because of Drew Brees than Reggie Bush.

People in Houston love Vince, many Houstonians went to UT, I was cheering on that run too. Even though he's on the Titans we still root for him to do well.

Yes, Ryans is great but let me ask you a question. If you could have Mario Williams or Vince Young on the Texans who would you choose?

I told myself I wasn't going to go on a long winded rant about this; but **** it you've made me do it. Here it goes...

For months leading up the draft it was obivious that the Texans should pick either Reggie Bush or Vince Young. Young is basically seen as the second coming of Jesus in the city of Houston which would have boosted ticket sales and judging by the way he played for the Titans a few more wins. They could have easily traded Carr to a team that needed a QB. Reggie would have been the spark to the offense that the team needed. They could have ran a duel back system with him and Davis similar to Deuce and Reggie. Carr finally would have had another target besides Andre Johnson.

Yet, they decide to draft neither of these guys and their is excuse is that Carr and Davis are their franchise offensive players. Apparently in Houston franchise means one season as they were both cut on Friday. You explain to me, logically, how in one year a quarterback goes from "the franchise" to being cut. They went back on everything they said last April with their trade for Schaub and their cuts of Davis and Carr.

The other excuse they used was that they wouldn't be able to stop anybody with Reggie and Vince. Fair arguement but guess what. They still can't stop anybody. Mario Williams may have great potential but he didn't do squat his rookie year while Vince Young won Rookie Of The Year and damn near lead his team to playoffs while the Texans finished with the eighth overall selection and Bush was a key part to the Saints rise to the elite in the NFC.

Explain to me how you had a succesful draft when everybody in the stadium is cheering the rival's quarterback as he scores the game winning TD.

Outside of the Mario Williams pick, they had a great draft. Demeco Ryans wont DROY, Winston is a keeper, Wali Lundy should be a contributor. Owen Daniels will be a starter for years it seems. Charles Spencer is dealing with injuries but he is a promising player if he ever gets healthy.

But yes, picking Mario Williams over Reggie Bush and Vince Young should go down as one of the greatest draft blunders in history. Mario was talented, yes. But Vince and Reggie were every bit as talented as Mario and as incredible it is that he is athletic and moves that well at 290 pounds, how many prospects have there ever been that can do the things Vince and Reggie can do respectively? The difference is Vince and Reggie had flat out incredible college careers and were elite playmakers who finished 1-2 in the heismann and played for championship teams. Mario Williams was a DE who was incredibly inconsistent and whose prescense wasnt even felt in many games and he was hardly a dominant player in college. It shouldnt have even been a decision. Heck, Id take Hawk over Mario in terms of defensive prospects. Both were incredible talents in terms of measurables, only difference was Hawk was a dominant player in college, Mario wasnt. Bottom line, you dont take a player number 1 overall who wasnt dominant in college. Mario should be a good DE, but I highly doubt he will ever be a dominant player in the NFL, something which Bush and Vince already are.

I would have to say the Lions. They had the fewest amount of wins in the NFL in the last 5 seasons. Matt Millen is a terrible GM and yet he gets an extension. And it shows how bad the team is when their fans show up to one of the games in Bengal's jerseys.

And before the draft last year, I thought the Texans should have drafted D'Brick. He was the team's biggest need and they could've traded down at least 2 spots and gotten him.

Outside of the Mario Williams pick, they had a great draft. Demeco Ryans wont DROY, Winston is a keeper, Wali Lundy should be a contributor. Owen Daniels will be a starter for years it seems. Charles Spencer is dealing with injuries but he is a promising player if he ever gets healthy.

But yes, picking Mario Williams over Reggie Bush and Vince Young should go down as one of the greatest draft blunders in history. Mario was talented, yes. But Vince and Reggie were every bit as talented as Mario and as incredible it is that he is athletic and moves that well at 290 pounds, how many prospects have there ever been that can do the things Vince and Reggie can do respectively? The difference is Vince and Reggie had flat out incredible college careers and were elite playmakers who finished 1-2 in the heismann and played for championship teams. Mario Williams was a DE who was incredibly inconsistent and whose prescense wasnt even felt in many games and he was hardly a dominant player in college. It shouldnt have even been a decision. Heck, Id take Hawk over Mario in terms of defensive prospects. Both were incredible talents in terms of measurables, only difference was Hawk was a dominant player in college, Mario wasnt. Bottom line, you dont take a player number 1 overall who wasnt dominant in college. Mario should be a good DE, but I highly doubt he will ever be a dominant player in the NFL, something which Bush and Vince already are.

I remember mid way through the season I thought Mario Williams would easily fall to the Bucs...I was WRONG!

I would have to say the Lions. They had the fewest amount of wins in the NFL in the last 5 seasons. Matt Millen is a terrible GM and yet he gets an extension. And it shows how bad the team is when their fans show up to one of the games in Bengal's jerseys.

And before the draft last year, I thought the Texans should have drafted D'Brick. He was the team's biggest need and they could've traded down at least 2 spots and gotten him.

I would have to say the Lions. They had the fewest amount of wins in the NFL in the last 5 seasons. Matt Millen is a terrible GM and yet he gets an extension. And it shows how bad the team is when their fans show up to one of the games in Bengal's jerseys.

And before the draft last year, I thought the Texans should have drafted D'Brick. He was the team's biggest need and they could've traded down at least 2 spots and gotten him.

Too bad we aren't looking at only the last 5 years. Look at the franchise history of both the Saints and Cardinals and be shocked at how bad they have both been. The Lions were competitive throughout the 90's and in the 50's and 60's. The Saints and Cardinals simply weren't at all.

Too bad we aren't looking at only the last 5 years. Look at the franchise history of both the Saints and Cardinals and be shocked at how bad they have both been. The Lions were competitive throughout the 90's and in the 50's and 60's. The Saints and Cardinals simply weren't at all.

Since when are we only talking salary cap era? And easy with the name calling there big man. The thread starter clearly says that the Cardinals were bad for 40 years, which seems quite a bit before the salary cap era. Bottom line, you are flat out wrong.

Since when are we only talking salary cap era? And easy with the name calling there big man. The thread starter clearly says that the Cardinals were bad for 40 years, which seems quite a bit before the salary cap era. Bottom line, you are flat out wrong.

I wasn't directing the insult towards anyone, people are taking **** back to like Otto Graham era and its getting annoying.

I wasn't directing the insult towards anyone, people are taking **** back to like Otto Graham era and its getting annoying.

Well I don't understand, that's what the thread called for. He mentioned the Cardinal's being bad for 40 years, their entire existance. Just like the Saints have been. The Lions haven't even been that bad all of the salary cap era, only the past 5 years. No matter how you slice it, the Cards and Saints are far and away the worst.

any of you saying the redskins are ********, tell me why we have the dumbest owner but we are the most vavuable franchise in sports, he might not have made great personnel decision in the past 5 years but come on redskins are on of the best franchises in sports

any of you saying the redskins are ********, tell me why we have the dumbest owner but we are the most vavuable franchise in sports, he might not have made great personnel decision in the past 5 years but come on redskins are on of the best franchises in sports

i would have to say that they have made some bad moves in the past few years but i would not put them anywhere near the best franchises is sport.

they have been going for about 40 something eyars now, and have never HOSTED a playoff game. JESUS. They just cant get it right. It seemed like they were on the right track last year, yet managed to win 5 games. Their offense is set, and dont give me the old well they had no OL...well a good franchise would go out and get what they need. NE had a big problem at WR this past season and boy have they done a GREAT job making things right. theres no question that things should be good in Arizona, but as long as the current owner iss in place there, they wont win. I still dont think they've done anything to help the OL, for god skaes they lost their best OL. and he stil wasnt that great.

They haven't done anything to help the OL? What are you talking about? They've spent a lot of money in the past in FA to bring good players in, haved drafted a ton of them in the last few years, and signed the best OL coach in the league this offseason.

And you think Leonard Davis was the Cardinals' best OL? Please talk when you've actually watched a Cardinals' game because he was atrocious this year.

I told myself I wasn't going to go on a long winded rant about this; but **** it you've made me do it. Here it goes...

For months leading up the draft it was obivious that the Texans should pick either Reggie Bush or Vince Young. Young is basically seen as the second coming of Jesus in the city of Houston which would have boosted ticket sales and judging by the way he played for the Titans a few more wins. They could have easily traded Carr to a team that needed a QB. Reggie would have been the spark to the offense that the team needed. They could have ran a duel back system with him and Davis similar to Deuce and Reggie. Carr finally would have had another target besides Andre Johnson.

Yet, they decide to draft neither of these guys and their is excuse is that Carr and Davis are their franchise offensive players. Apparently in Houston franchise means one season as they were both cut on Friday. You explain to me, logically, how in one year a quarterback goes from "the franchise" to being cut. They went back on everything they said last April with their trade for Schaub and their cuts of Davis and Carr.

The other excuse they used was that they wouldn't be able to stop anybody with Reggie and Vince. Fair arguement but guess what. They still can't stop anybody. Mario Williams may have great potential but he didn't do squat his rookie year while Vince Young won Rookie Of The Year and damn near lead his team to playoffs while the Texans finished with the eighth overall selection and Bush was a key part to the Saints rise to the elite in the NFC.

Explain to me how you had a succesful draft when everybody in the stadium is cheering the rival's quarterback as he scores the game winning TD.

Its a marathon, not a sprint. For all the raving of Vince Young, he's still an unproven passer. Reggie Bush would NOT succeed greatly in Houston. They run ZBS. Reggie Bush for all his accolades has been a below average RB in the NFL so far.

Mario Williams has the potential, and before he got injured was realizing it, to be a dominant DE in the league. They got an absolute stud MIKE in DeMeco Ryans. They built up their oline. They got a good TE in the draft. They got rid of the deadweight known as Carr and got a solid qb for cheap. They have a plan, thats building a dominant defense to combat Peyton Manning. And I think it will work. You can't kill Mario Williams after an injury filled rookie year. Couple the fact that even then, he outperformed Reggie Bush for most of the season, I don't see your line of reasoning. Don't jump to conclusions so quickly. I think the Texans so far are making all the right moves. Come back to me in 3 years, and see if you still feel the same way. I guarantee you the Texans will prove they made the right moves 3 years from now.

1. The Lions. You look at their talent and wonder why they don't have a better record. Matt Millen stays despite the worst winning % of any team.

2. The Raidahs. They and their fans continue to believe it's still 1985. They have reaked of suckage, except for the Gannon era, for 20 years now. They always have to scrap the bottom of the barrel for coaches. Their scouting department is one of the smallest. They keep drafting busts and taking chances on renegate players (like Jake Moss) without getting results.

3. The Texans. 5 years without a winning (even a .500 one) season. They are going down the path of the Saints.

4. Browns. This team has nothing to do with the earlier Browns. Those Browns are now in Baltimore. One winning season since their expansion year in 1999. Draft bust after draft bust.

what i meant was just the worst franchise in the NFL, pre or post salary cap. I still think the Cards, because to have never hosted a playoff game in your existance, and were talking 40+ years now. They are not on the rise, they dont make the right signings, they went full into O last offseason, and they greatly need to improve the D this year, and so fa havetn done anything.

They are pathetic. The Browns are getting there, but you cant say the Raiders, they've been to the top before and know what its like to be good. The Cards on the other hand play in the weakest didvision in the NFL and can still only win 5 games a year.

The guyn above makes sense as to what he says about the TExans...good point, they had a sick draft, but still the main point is that they took Williams over Young....but honestly i look at ti like, Carr has shown that he can provide for a team, an they need to build their D, they gotta start up front, MArio, then build the LB with Demeco. Sounds ok to me, but we'll see.

Still no doubt that the Cardinals win this won. They are pathetic and all the hype this year wil lead to 5 more wins, s hear comes another 5 win season. For all you sying how their O is sick...look at what i said about NE who's O was still sick, but didnt have WR, so what thyey do via FA??? thats the mark of one hell of a franchise.